La Dee-vina Comedia

Whether we like it or not, ever since players went fully professional, the competition became a business. I can't see it going back to semi-professional footballers who train only 2 or 3 times a week with the commensurate drop-off in fitness and skills. And if it's a business, it needs to make money to pay the players (and the officials, such as umpires, etc).

Don't forget to add from the other side of the ledger: sponsorship dollars from the NT Government membership money (if any) from NT locals "brand" exposure value (if any) from being physically present in Darwin and the Alice I suspect only the first dot point has any meaningful value.

Personally, I don't understand this concept. Couldn't we equally say we've given the number 12 to the first player we draft as a tribute to Sylvia, given that he was the first player we took in his draft year?

While I agree with what you've said, that's only relevant when we have the ball. In my view, our speed weakness is when we have to defend. We look very slow when other teams have the ball and stream through the centre. Having said that, I think sometimes it's a problem of being slow in thought (ie, slow to react) rather than physically slow.

Because the AFL is a competition of many things. One of them involves tradition. Another is that a large group of Australians support Essendon and through no fault of their own have been made to suffer the ignominy of supporting a club that brought the game into disrepute. Those followers deserve something in return for continuing to support the AFL competition.

I agree with all the above and add that no-one in the industry ever has a bad word against Bruce. His real passions are athletics and horse racing, but I suspect he could call any sport and make it interesting. For those complaining about Bruce, just remember how terrible it was having to listen to Basil Zemplis calling swimming at the Olympics. Chalk and cheese.

I'm very surprised Essendon is playing North Melbourne on Good Friday. Only because it can't be a long term solution given that Good Friday and ANZAC Day can be so close that they could encompass one round of football. For that reason, I thought none of Collingwood, Richmond, Melbourne or Essendon would ever be chosen to play on Good Friday. If the AFL really wants to make Good Friday football a success I would have thought they would have tried to create an ongoing "blockbuster" involving North and another team who would play that day every year. Logic suggests that "other team" should be Carlton being the only potential powerhouse team that doesn't have a locked in commitment for Easter or ANZAC Day/Eve.

There are plenty of academic papers which discuss punishment versus rehabilitation. Clearly the AFL prefers the latter. And for the long-term good of the AFL competition, that's probably the right call.

Not at all. Just in time for a joyful delivery at the end of September.

I will miss being able to turn up to the MCC members late and still get a good seat, though.

I suspect in hindsight the single worst idea the MFC has had this century was sacking Dean Bailey instead of Cameron Schwab after the 186 debacle.

13 free-to-air matches. Anyone know off the top of their heads what it has been in previous years? Mind you, I'm only interested in a sub-set of free-to-air matches being those when we are not playing at the MCG. As an aside, it amuses me that the way someone has put together the graphics that it looks like in Round 13 we're playing the AFL. Not sure if it's home or away, but these days I think we'd win.

A delightful analogy. So much better than calling it a "meat market".

I do. Not because of any lingering concerns about the foot but because that's his second bone-related problem (that we know of) which appears to be stress-related. That suggests to me that he is player that comes with a higher risk of acquiring a future bone-related problem than someone who has never exhibited any bone-related injuries. It's a bit like ACLs. The data shows that if a player has torn one ACL they are a greater risk of having another ACL injury than a person who has never had such an injury. I hope Hogan plays completely injury-free for the rest of his career, but if I'm in the business of managing a playing list, I believe that he has a higher risk of injury than players who have not had the same injuries than he has had to date.

Which reminds me of Michael Voss's famous sledge when he tried to put his brother Brett off when having a shot for goal: "My Dad slept with your Mum last night". (Although I don't think he used the words "slept with").

Completely agree with you.

Your post is a little ambiguous, so, just to be clear, while the article was written by Robbo, I suspect its re-release probably had nothing to do with him but was more likely an editorial decision by the publisher.

Yarra Park Reserve is created through its own Act, called the Melbourne (Yarra Park) Land Act 1980. Because it's a 1980 Act it may as well have been written in Old English (which is my way of saying that it is harder to interpret for a non-lawyer like me than a modern piece of legislation). Within that Act, though, is the following provision: 22 Punt Road Oval Agreement (1) Nothing in the amendments made to this Act by the 2009 Act is to be taken as having the effect of— (a) making the Trust a party to the Punt Road Oval Agreement; or (b) giving rise to any duty of the Trust or liability or other obligation on the Trust arising out of the Punt Road Oval Agreement. (2) In this section, the Punt Road Oval Agreement means the Funding Agreement for the Redevelopment of Training, Administrative and Community Facilities at Punt Road Oval entered into between the State of Victoria, the Melbourne City Council, the Richmond Football Club, ABN 25 679 793 340, and the Australian Football League, ACN 004 155 211 on 29 June 2009 in respect of the land described in the Schedule. The Schedule has a rather crude drawing of a roughly circular plot of land with Punt Road drawn on its right and Brunton Avenue below it which would seem to match with what we would expect would be the Punt Road Oval. So, I think that means the Punt Road Oval is within the Yarra Park Reserve but is managed by a separate arrangement allowed for by the legislation. [PS: If there are any planning or land-use lawyers out there, feel free to correct any misconceptions I may have about this.]

Good question. Something else for me to research!

I was curious about the origin of the surname Sylvia so looked it up. It's apparently Old English but most interestingly (and pleasing) was that Colin is named in the article as one of the "Contemporary Notables of the Name Sylvia (post 1700)".

While I can see the resemblance between Nick Reiwoldt and the animal (an alpaca?) I can also see where Sam McClure got the inspiration for his hairstyle. (Sam, if you're reading this, it's time you grew up and got a proper adult's haircut).

I agree that Carlton would have been happy the first couple of years. But they shouldn't have been. Having Judd just papered over serious cracks and gave a short-term sugar hit. Not Judd's fault but Carlton were naive if they thought one superstar player is all that is necessary to be a success.

Seeing as you asked, I've had a look at the enabling legislation. I've summarised it so as to explain the relationships. This is a longish read but it may be of interest to some: Summary of the Melbourne Cricket Ground’s management and control arrangements Excerpt from the Preamble to the Melbourne Cricket Ground Act 2009: “By an Order in Council dated 9 December 1861 land known as the Melbourne Cricket Ground was permanently reserved as a metropolitan cricket ground. By a Crown grant dated 17 June 1862 the Melbourne Cricket Ground was granted to the trustees of the Melbourne Cricket Ground upon trust that the Ground and the buildings on it be maintained and used as and for a place for playing cricket and for related conveniences. … Under the Melbourne Cricket Ground Act 1933…Land described in the Fifth Schedule to that Act and known as the ground was granted to the trustees of the Melbourne Cricket Ground upon trust that the Ground be maintained and used as and for a place for playing at cricket and for conveniences connected therewith and when not required for cricket for such other purposes not inconsistent with the foregoing as the trustees think fit and for no other purpose whatsoever.” In 2009 the Melbourne Cricket Ground Act 1933 was replaced with an updated law not surprisingly called the Melbourne Cricket Ground Act 2009. Key features of the new Act (for the purposes of this discussion): · The law establishes the Melbourne Cricket Ground Trust which is given responsibility to “manage, control and make improvements to” the MCG and surrounding land and to be the committee of management for the Yarra Park Reserve (hereafter just called Yarra Park) · The Melbourne Cricket Club “is entitled to occupy the Ground to the extent and in the manner enjoyed by it at the commencement of the Melbourne Cricket Ground Act 1933” subject to certain conditions (such as not changing its constitution without the consent of the Trust and that it doesn’t persistently breach the Trust’s regulations, etc) · The Trust can call for tenders for the management of the whole of a part of the MCG · Notwithstanding the previous point, the Trust may appoint the Melbourne Cricket Club as Ground manager and while the MCC is Ground manager, the Trust can’t enter into a contract with anyone else to manage the Ground · While the MCC is the Ground manager, it receives and retains all entrance fees and revenues arising in the course of its management of the Ground (presumably this includes ground advertising). The agreement it has with the Trust to be Ground manager (see previous point) may mean that the MCC shares this revenue with the Trust · The Trust can delegate to the MCC any function or power that relates to the management, control, improvement or use of the Ground or to the Trust’s role as committee of management for Yarra Park; · similarly, the MCC, with the approval of the Trust, can delegate to any person (which presumably would include the Melbourne Football Club) any function or power which relates to the use of the ground or Yarra Park (this may be handy should the new facilities mooted for Yarra Park ever be built).

What happens on Friday 9 November which warrants there being two separate free agency periods on either side of that date? Can anyone explain what the difference is between free agency period (1) and free agency period (2)? I can understand free agency period (3), because it's held immediately after the draft and allows teams to fill any remaining spots with delisted free agents, although why they just don't draft them the day before I don't understand. Perhaps it's something to do with negotiating player-specific contracts.